MSI Z170A Gaming M7 Conclusion

Of the motherboards we received for review before the launch of Skylake, we had a reasonable mix of the regular price bands, from $160 to $250, and even up at the top for $500. These more mid-range price bands are typically where most motherboard manufacturers duke it out for sales, despite the fact that the bulk of sales is usually below this. At $160-$300, it allows the manufacturers to stretch in terms of technical prowess and their view of the market.

The MSI Z170A Gaming M7 comes in at $230, arguably at the higher end of most people's budgets but enough to satisfy the enthusiast space. From a hardware perspective, the M7 focuses on its key marketing points towards gaming, such as the Killer E2400 network port, Nahimic audio software, easy overclocking functionality and new easier to use BIOS interface for new users.  Other features come in as well - metallic guards to strengthen the PCIe slots when heavy graphics cards are in place, USB 10Gbps ports in 3.1-A and 3.1-C, dual M.2 slots that run at PCIe 3.0 x4 mode and SATAe connectivity.

Negative points off the bat start with the Nahimic audio software. It completely cuts out the EQ, even when you uninstall it - a big no-no from anyone who genuinely likes to customize their sound quality. Most of the features the Nahimic software provides are essentially EQ adjustments anyway, leaving me to wonder why MSI is paying through the nose for license fees (and passing that cost to the buyer) rather than doing basic modifications to the Realtek software that comes free with the codec. Additional to this, even with the Nahimic implementation disabled, audio performance in our tests did not set the world alight. Power consumption at load (at stock) was a little high as a result of the motherboard applying more voltage to the processor than expected. This might be related to the MultiCore Enhancement used.

Also to note is that our overclock testing, perhaps due to the beta BIOS versions we were using at the time, seem to be behind some other products. But because a review is a snapshot in time, we perhaps shouldn't hold it against the board unless other MSI motherboards in the future perform similarly. Also, at $230, one might have expected either a second network port (wireless or wired) or at least an Intel network controller. For most users that care about the network controller, Killer comes across more of a marketing checkbox compared to the control normally attributed to the Intel network ports.

Where the MSI Z170A Gaming M7 wins comes down to our BIOS implementing MultiCore Enhancement by default, resulting in a better stock performance. As a result, all our base processor tests but the MSI ahead. The new EZ mode in the BIOS is a good design worth playing around with, as well as MSI having the best driver/software update software for motherboards we've ever seen. This becomes more useful given that later BIOSes should become available as time goes on.

At the end of the day, MSI might struggle to sell this for $230 MSRP. The market will have other motherboards to play with that offer more features with less marketing buzz (Killer/Nahimic) at the same price or lower, perhaps pushing users towards the Gaming M5 and below. There are some take home positives, such as the new easy overclock tool and the drive towards catering for their intended market, though pushing it in to a higher than expected price band may drop it off some build lists sooner than MSI would have hoped for. As we test more motherboards, we should be able to develop a taste for the ecosystem as a whole and understand how each of the motherboard manufacturers are approaching the Skylake platform.

Gaming Performance 2015
Comments Locked

56 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanNeely - Tuesday, September 22, 2015 - link

    I suspect the problem is that they ran out of high speed IO lanes for USB3 ports, didn't want to put 2.0 ports on (if they did someone else would be flaming them for doing so), and since this is a mid price board decided against using an onboard USB3 hub to add more ports. Having two x4 m.2 slots are probably to blame. The 1xx series chipset has a lot more IO than the 9x series that it replaced; but without using USB3 hubs or PLX chips it doesn't have enough to max out a full ATX board.
  • prime2515103 - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    This whole lack of HDMI 2.0 in PC's needed to end like a year ago.
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    HDMI is still not native to the Intel integrated graphics yet without a LS-PCon or Alpine Ridge (extra cost), but chances are with this motherboard that people will be using a discrete card. Pick a modern HDMI 2.0 capable one and you're set.
  • Gigaplex - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    Such as... the latest AMD Fury series? Still not supported. I think only Maxwell supports it so far. We need better support from the industry as a whole.
  • artifex - Wednesday, September 23, 2015 - link

    I thought the industry was moving to DisplayPort?
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, September 23, 2015 - link

    The PC industry is trying to move that way (in addition to a few minor technical advantages, to avoid paying HDMI royalties; a few cents/port adds up when you're making millions of something); consumer electronics and home theater are very HDMI oriented though, so we're probably stuck with it indefinitely too.
  • ruthan - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    eSata - is someone realy using this? External sata HDD connection woub be nice, but what about power for HDD, some USB to sata cable?
    Where is added value in comparision with usual Sata bracket connected to internal Sata port?

    Few years ago seems, that this problem would solve eSataP - with included power but this standard died and we are still using USB3 to Sata bulky converters.
  • Gigaplex - Tuesday, September 22, 2015 - link

    I use eSATA. My 3.5" enclosure is mains powered, and eSATA is much faster than USB 2.0.
  • ppi - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    Since I was considering this mobo, is it possible to:
    a) Disable Killer NIC prioritization; and
    b) Disable Nahimic effects (no equallizer)?
    Thanks.
  • K_Space - Monday, September 21, 2015 - link

    I thought the number of lanes has not changed from what Haswell offers (?16 PCI-E 3.0)?
    Then excuse the noob question with regard to the 20 PCI lanes:
    If you have CF running and an M.2 x4 PCI-E 3.0 SSD; can you be run 8x/8x for the CF and full x4 for the M.2 SSD?

    The reason I ask is that I have an Extreme6 Z97 with a R9 295x2 on the first PCI-E 3.0 and an XP941 M.2 SSD in their UltraM.2 slot (also PCI-E 3.0). According to the AsRock manual (and CPU-Z confirms), the 295x2 is running @ x8, and the M.2 at x4. If I attempt to install another 295x2 (not that it is a good idea) I'm informed the second card would have to drop to x4 (8+4+4). Given that the 295x2 is dual GPU and linking through PCI-E, latency with x4 will probably not be ideal (I recall reading somewhere that up to x8 link speed won't hurt the 295x2 CF but anything lower might).
    I may be confusing quite few concepts here so your patience and detailed explaination would be much appreciated!!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now